Allowed

Smt.ram Bai And Ors. v. Kirti Kumar Soni And Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC5 Mar 2014MAC/854/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal under s. 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988, the High Court held that the Tribunal applied the wrong multiplier for dependency but confirmed the total loss of dependency amount. The Court enhanced compensation under conventional heads for loss of consortium, love, affection, and funeral expenses. The appeal was allowed with a total award of Rs. 2.71 lacs.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award is modified. Total compensation increased to Rs. 2.71 lacs with interest at 6% p.a. from filing of claim until realization.

Smt.ram Bai And Ors. Vs Kirti Kumar Soni And Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT

¶4

BILASPUR

¶5

.^^^^

¶6

MISC. APPEALIQNo. S S c/ /2012.

¶7

APPELLANTS : 1. Snit. Rani Bai, CLAIMANTS W/o. late Shri Firangi Ram Tamboli, aged about 51 years,

¶8

^.<^2-
•^^•~
^"°"

¶9

Jageshwar Kuinar Tamboli, aged about 35 years, S/o. late Firangi Ram Tamboli,

¶10

Kishan Kumar Tamboli, S/o. late Firangi ,Ram Tamboli, aged about 19 years,

¶11

All Resident of villagfe Rasouta, P.S. Pamgarh, District ^anjgriChampa (C.G.)

¶12

Presently Resident of Behind Old High Court Building Rasouta Bada, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

RESPONDENTS 1. Kirti Kumar Soni,

¶15

aged about 30 years, S/o. Shri Sudarshan Soni, R/o. Baloda, P.S. Baloda, District Janjgir Chamap (C.G.)

¶16

¶17

Shiv Kumar Singh, ^-^{^-^^-^} aged-abeu^SQ-yearG, S/e-Shri Sudarshan-Snni, P/o RRloda, P S. Baloda, Diatrict Janjgir Chamap \ ~/%'^ ^^^^6'S TW^- l (C.G.) ^/D ^ ^^^^

¶18

Manager,

¶19

The Oriental Insurance Company, Branch Office behind Old High Court Building, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶20

APPEAL U/s. 173 OF THE MOTOR VBHICLE ACT 1988

<br>

Kfc:" Ss-—~-

5^ /

^..^"^

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶27

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker

¶28

M.A.(C)No.854of2012

¶29

Appellants Smt. Ram Bai and others Claimants

¶30

VERSUS

¶31

Respondents Kirti Kumar Soni and others

¶32

Present:

¶33

Shri Sushobhit Singh, counsel for the appellants. None forrespondent No. 1. Shri Hemant Gupta, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri N.K. Malviya, counsel for respondent No.3.

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(5th March, 2014)

¶36

This appeal filed by the claimants arises out of the award dated v 9.5.2012 passed by 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribun&l") in claim case No.54/11 awarding compensation of Rs.2.17 lacs in ^vour of the claimants for the death of Firangi Ram. 02. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 18.7.2008 when Firangi Ram was riding his bicycle, he was dashed by a bus bearing registration No. C.G.10G 0161, which was being driven by respondent No.1 rashly and negligently, as a result ofwhich Firangi Ram died on the spot. 03. A claim casewas filed by the claimants, who are widow and two sons of the deceased, before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs. 12.90 lacs, inter alia, pleading that at the relevant time, the deceased was 58 years of age and was earning Rs.25,000/- from agriculture and Rs.54,000/- from tailoring work, meaning thereby his annual income was about Rs. 80,000/-. 04. However, the Tribunal after appreciation of the evidence on record by the impugned award has granted a total compensation of

•^

Rs.2.17 lacs with interest @ 7.5% p.a. in favour ofthe claimants. 05. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal while assessing the compensation has committed an illegality by taking notional income and applying the multiplier of 8 whereas in view of law laid down in Sar/a Verma (Smt.) and others Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, multiplier of 9 would be applicable in the present case. He furi:her submits that the amount awarded under the conventional heads is also on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably.

¶41

On the other hand, supporting the impugned award it has been argued by learned counsel for the respondents the compensation awarded by the Tribunal being just and reasonable requires no interference by this Court.

¶42

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶43

So far as income of the deceased is c0ncemed, the Tribunal in v the absence of there being any specific evidence on record regarding income of the deceased has rightly assessed incdme of the deceased as Rs.36,000/- on the basis of notional income. Thus, ^fter deducting 1/3rd from this income towards personal and living expehses of the deceased, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.24,000/- p.a. Since the deceased was survived by three dependents, in view law laid down in Sarla Verma (supra), the multiplier applicable in this case is 9 and not 8 as has been applied by the Tribunal. After applying this multiplier, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 2.16 lacs.

¶44

As regards the amount awarded towards conventional heads, in the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the same appears to be on the lower side and calls for suitable enhancement. Accordingly, the amount awarded towards loss of consortium is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- from Rs.5,000/-, the amount awarded towards loss of love and affection is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- from Rs.5,000/- and the amount awarded for funeral expenses is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- from Rs.5,000/-. However, the amount awarded towards loss of estate is

•~~r^3yi^-£fa--'

•^l

^•^"

kept as it is. As such, under the conventional heads the claimants are entitled for a total sum of Rs.55,000/- instead of Rs.25,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.

¶49

On the basis of aforesaid discussions, the appellants are held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2.71 lacs and since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.2.17, after deducting the same the appellants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.54,000/-. This additional amount of compensation shall carry the interest @ 6% p.a. from the date offiling ofclaim petition till realization.

¶50

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award impugned stands modified to the above extent. —

¶51

Sd/pntinker Diwaker Judge

¶52

¶53

asffss

Smt.ram Bai And Ors. v. Kirti Kumar Soni And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.ram Bai And Ors. v. Kirti Kumar Soni And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd. Vs Smt. Wetti Hungi and Ors.

Uttam Kumar Vs Ramkisun and Others

Arvind Kumar Dewangan Vs Executive Engineer, Public Works Department B/R Division And Ors.

Sardar Kuljeet Singh Kohli Vs Smt.Rajkumari Gupta and Others

Bajrang Lal Agrawal Vs the New India Insurance Co.Ltd.and Ors.

Pawan Kumar Tiwari Vs Chandra Shekhar Sahu And Ors.